"Frame By Frame" *300th Episode* DISCUSSION **Spoilers**

Catherine Willows returns to help the CSIs solve a cold case that has haunted the team for 14 years, on the milestone 300th episode. Marg Helgenberger returns as Catherine Willows and Jason Priestley guest stars as casino mogul Jack Witten.

It was posted somewhere on twitter (I think on "CSI Writer's Room") that Eric Szmanda (he just got a twitter account according to them) and Elisabeth Harnois will be live tweeting during the 300th episode.

Nick will appear in the first three episodes of season 14, and his absence will be explained in episode four when it is revealed that Catherine Willows (Marg Helgenberger) has chosen him to receive special training at Quantico.

Click to expand...

Bullshit.

According to TV Guide, the episode will tentatively air on November 20. The site also reports that Nick’s absence will be addressed in next week’s 300th episode, when it is confirmed that he is in Quantico for special training (as reported here).

Click to expand...

Double bullshit.

Always lies when it comes to Nick. Always. They say one thing and never follow through.

Happy to see a LOT of people on the CSI Facebook page asking about Nick's absence and happy to enlighten them. The Bring Back George Eads page has gotten a ton of new likes and comments tonight.

(BTW, I did not watch the episode but those who did have said nothing was mentioned about Nick's absence. It also sounds like Catherine didn't "return" to help solve a case either.)

Nick will appear in the first three episodes of season 14, and his absence will be explained in episode four when it is revealed that Catherine Willows (Marg Helgenberger) has chosen him to receive special training at Quantico.

Click to expand...

Bullshit.

According to TV Guide, the episode will tentatively air on November 20. The site also reports that Nick’s absence will be addressed in next week’s 300th episode, when it is confirmed that he is in Quantico for special training (as reported here).

Click to expand...

Double bullshit.

Always lies when it comes to Nick. Always. They say one thing and never follow through.

Happy to see a LOT of people on the CSI Facebook page asking about Nick's absence and happy to enlighten them. The Bring Back George Eads page has gotten a ton of new likes and comments tonight.

(BTW, I did not watch the episode but those who did have said nothing was mentioned about Nick's absence. It also sounds like Catherine didn't "return" to help solve a case either.)

Click to expand...

No Nick mention. And no, Catherine was included in the flashbacks but no actual appearance...:|...ALTHOUGH the last scene was bittersweet

I'm not sure what happened to the scene that addressed Nick's absence. Originally, it was in 1404 "Last Supper," and in the script it happened in the beginning of the episode when Finn enters DB's office. DB is on the phone with Nick telling him to say hello to Catherine, and Finn walks in and DB enlightens her on his training. Maybe it was cut for time.

I'm not sure what happened to the scene that addressed Nick's absence. Originally, it was in 1404 "Last Supper," and in the script it happened in the beginning of the episode when Finn enters DB's office. DB is on the phone with Nick telling him to say hello to Catherine, and Finn walks in and DB enlightens her on his training. Maybe it was cut for time.

Click to expand...

Uh? :wtf: I don't recall any of that. And I would. And others, too. So I guess it was cut out.

Edit: Okay, I just finished watching. It was quite disappointing that they didn't actually have Catherine visiting the lab, which I was very excited about, but just filmed fake flashbacks with Marg. Thus, there was no damn mention of why Nick was absent. Maybe I was a little bit naive, but I really thought that all these recent spoilers would really imply, mean, claim, confirm that it was going to be explained why Nick wasn't around. I mean, they said that a lot of times.

The case was very good, but it would have been much better if it had been an actual cold case. The thing with these fake flashbacks is that people change over time, they put on weight, get older, get wrinkles, so you can always tell that those scenes they used were fake. Putting on heavy make-up or another haircut/wig doesn't change that.
But I loved the ending with the REAL short sequences showed. A lot of Grissom (*yay*), Warrick, and Catherine!

Uh? :wtf: I don't recall any of that. And I would. And others, too. So I guess it was cut out.

Click to expand...

I think you're right as I don't recall any mention of Nick's absence at all so far. I tend to zone out of the episodes these days, though, so I can't swear.

"Frame by Frame" really annoyed me to no end, mainly because the 'faux-backs' were so self-conscious. Ecklie was being a bastard, so Sara has to say a line about how 'political' he is (btw, who actually says a line like that, even on television?). Greg was dressed in his old lab coat, so Catherine has to say a line about how he's a great tech but has to change certain things if he wants to get out in the field. Long time fans didn't need exposition like that, and those lines delivered nothing for newer fans. I'm guessing they were trying to highlight the "Look how far everyone has come" angle, but they utterly ruined it with those lines. We're not idiots, we didn't need blatantly obvious lines like that to get the point. It felt condescending as hell.

There was nothing organic about them, those lines hung a massive lantern on the "Look! We're in the past!" thing, as if the hideous soft focus and blown-out light wouldn't tell us?

Same thing with the 'retrospective' at the end, panning over all of the evidence. Yeah, they were supposed to be working an old case, but they just didn't emphasize the theme of time passing, or any kind of real reminiscing over so many years of cases. It came out of nowhere at the very end! They gave us what amounted to a highlight reel from past seasons, and didn't do one single solitary thing within the plot to earn the nostalgic moment they were trying to push. A mention of Grissom's name at the beginning, throwaway lines reminding us of 'how things used to be', and a couple of brief flashbacks do not earn that moment. All it did was invite comparison to seasons past, and shine a light on how terrible this show has become.

And yeah, showing Nick at the end without once explaining his absence was just awkward and shoddy. Also, I think it inadvertently highlighted the fact this show has lost any heart it ever had. Nick's character has always been the one with the biggest heart, and he wasn't there. Showing his face (and Grissom's) at the end just emphasized the sore lack of humanity in the show these days. A highlight reel ain't gonna bring that back.

Marg Helgenberger got, what, about three minutes of screen time, tops? I accept full personal responsibility for taking the bait all the time, but it doesn't change the fact the public relations team on this show are really getting pathetic. To me it just shows they have no faith in this show to stand on its own merits anymore, they have to keep resorting to sleight-of-hand tricks in press releases (and stunt casting).

It's just a show, granted, but it was one I really respected once upon a time. I really enjoyed it so much, and that's probably why this episode in particular made me so damn sad. I honestly feel like it has been inflated egos and the descent into 'style over substance' which ruined the crap out of this show, and I really feel that was wholly preventable.

At least we had Henry sashaying for the old time movie cameras. He's the MVP of this particular episode for me.

I did like the ending scene of going through the show.
But that made me mad all over again.
When Grissom left I was crushed.
Yes I was actually depressed.
William Petersen was tired of this job.
At the time he left this was if the number one show , very close.
He was angry they were diluting the product with NY and Miami.

I can't tell you how much I love Gil Grissom, especially the show started on friday , where if you are home watching tv on friday night and you are born in 1969, your life. well is lonely.

If you are 21 and home on a friday night you are just waiting till later to go out.

When this show came out I was 31 years old and Now I am 44.

I love this show. I love the science , I love the characters, I love the justice, This show changed how people preceive evidence in the court room for good or bad, csi factor is here to stay.

When I tell you last night's episode re-opened old wounds for me, you clearly see from the wall of text, I loved this show.
Its time to put it to bed.
They can't get Gil Grissom to make an appearance?

They can't get a flash back to Warrick who Gil called the rock of the team.

They can't get a better scene with Brass? Really?

To say I am hurt and crazy , yes I know I am crazy to be this fanatical about a tv show and the characters.

Its sad for me. I do not think at we will get a 400th episode. Or even a 350th episode.

The writing was sub par. It could have been better.

TooLongIdidn'tRead: I wish they showed more flashbacks or flashbacks that were filmed recented with Gil and Brass.

I thought it was an okay episode, but not great. Bringing Marg back had such potential, but they blew it by only using her in flashbacks - why couldn't she be featured in the present? Why couldn't they use Brass more - he has been on since the beginning. And, really, would it have killed them to mention where Nick was - the guy has been on since day one.

As for the case, all the originals should have taken center stage. Grissom, Warrick, and Nick should have some how been involved in that episode - even Mandy and Wendy.

They should have begged Tarantino to help write and direct an episode. I'm sure if he is still a fan, he would have come up with something that would have pleased long time viewers.

It was okay. I liked the credits but they also made me sad, seeing what it once was and what it has become. I wish this was the very last episode of the series as now we're going back to it getting worse.

I didn't notice Nick's absence in the previous episode but I definitely noticed it in this one. He should have been there and not just in the credits. Catherine should have been there too. Properly. For all the promotion she was in it only for a few seconds. I liked Sara's WLVU mug, thought it was interesting.

Still, this was yet another case where I didn't care at all about the victim and I haven't cared about any of the victims for several episodes. This show used to be about the victims and making us care enough about solving each crime. Now it's all over the place. Rich people, famous people, rich casino players… whatever happened to everyday people?

I'm not sure what happened to the scene that addressed Nick's absence. Originally, it was in 1404 "Last Supper," and in the script it happened in the beginning of the episode when Finn enters DB's office. DB is on the phone with Nick telling him to say hello to Catherine, and Finn walks in and DB enlightens her on his training. Maybe it was cut for time.

Click to expand...

It just goes to prove my point, that what they say what is going to happen to Nick or planned for Nick or whatever, never happens.

Just like last season when his quitting was going to be addressed throughout the season. Never happened and then at the 2nd half mark said they didn't have time to address it. Uh yeah they did. And that they would address it before the season end, SURPRISE didn't happen.

And since they have such disregard for Nick and George I don't expect much when he comes back. Obviously, to them he isn't an integral part of the show and to them, probably never was.

In any case, I didn't watch the episode, but I did watch the montage at the end and again reducing this episode to GSR is so wrong on so many levels. The last image should have been a group shot, like the one the showed in For Warrick.

Anthony Zuiker did not create this show to be Grissom and Sara. Showing something about that in the montage, fine, but not last like that.

It's just like the reduced Grissom to be nothing, but in relationship with Sara. The jungle shot should have been at the beginning of his last episode and the final shot should have been of him walking out of the lab and fading to black. Much more of an impact and deserving to the character of Gil Grissom.

Overall was very disappointed with this episode.
To only have Marg come back in flashbacks was a huge letdown and made a solid case less so with all the flashbacks etc.
And the fact Nick's absence wasn't addressed at all in this episode didn't help either.

wow! a 14 years old cold case? are they jesting? there isn’t any time shift between fiction and “real” world. we don’t get many hints about this; but they are unmistakable (i.e.: i remember the date on Warwick’s grave in Fallen Angel; the date on the video in Turn on, Tune In, Drop Dead, the day before the episode aired...). Did Sara Sidle work as a CSI in Las Vegas in 1999? am i missing something?
i know, i know: the writers are too busy and they cannot waste their priceless time trying to know the story they are writing about...sigh!
This close the case to me. any other comment would be redundant.
ps: did Brass deserve this?